About your Search

20130121
20130129
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12
of the denying quorum and in the case of speaking as long as you cou could, you had to spend time and energy, you had to organize and it was visible before this body. it was visible before the reporters gathered in the balcony. therefore, the american people, long before there was a television camera here, could see what you were doing and the public could provide feedback on that. but now we come to the modern era. from 1970 forward. in which it became popular to start using the objection as an instrument of party warfare, the objection to a final vote. you know, if we turn back before 1970, you had an overlap of the parties of perhaps 30 members. and so if one had used his objection, they'd have a good sense that you would be able to get cloture. furthermore, there was a social contract that you only interrupted the workings of this body on an issue of deep principle. you only blockaded the operations of the senate on an issue of profound concern to your state. not as a routine instrument of party politics. but that's changed over the last 45 years, since 1970 forward, the last 43 years, in whi
is increasingly economic policy, and we have an undersecretary for economic affairs, economics, energy etc.. i think that the state department historical use to have a foreign commercial service back in 1979. it slipped away. i think the secretary had the time -- i think that is something we ought to be doing in a very significant way. obviously working with the treasury with agriculture -- atta boy -- ag does and the treasury department does, and i think there is much more that we can do to augment our engagement in the private sector and their desires and needs abroad. i will give you an example. when i was in hong kong and number of years ago i met with our commercial service people. we had three of them. three people in hong kong. and they said they were overwhelmed. they had no ability to be given to mary rfp from china cummins writ with other countries. france was there, germany, england, others were much more aggressive in their promotion of their companies. and that is the world we are living in today. so i think we have to be much more aggressive in that respect. it's not an expenditu
for coming. more than 30 years of service. the energy and natural resources committee, we are continuing to san $400 billion a year overseas to buy oil. your colleague senator lugar for a long time told us the only way to beat a cartel, sponsored open fuel standard, basically make a competitive market, the move, automobiles, trucks, weather is electricity or methanol or ethanol or whenever to have a market so that like brazil when you drive up to the pump you have a choice and the price goes down. do you think that is a good idea? with your colleague gone now a huge loss to our country. would you be supportive of a competitive way to break the opec cartel? >> in fracturing that competitive instrument, that is causing that to happen. we had a great fortune of this technology to break through that is going to put this in a completely different position than we have been in the past so i don't think we need -- we have seen the effort to try to develop alternative competitive sources of energy. the problem is they can't be competitive, and particularly because of the new discovery of oil and
until they are 26. i worked very hard on that in the house energy and commerce committee, and pleased to see it in the final act. i'm wondering especially given that your testimony talks a lot of the age of many profound mental illnesses being between 16 to 25 op woodring url lardy observing the positive impact of the increased level of insurance for that age population that age cohort. >> we know the provision to allow young people to stay on their parents' insurance and the provision to prohibit exclusion from preexisting conditions both help young people with mental health and substance abuse disorders stay on and keep injured and be able to get access to insurance when they may not have access to it otherwise. millions of young people are covered through that process already come and i don't have a specific number but we know that those young people have these disorders are part of that group. >> thank you, senator. >> senator murkowski. >> thank you mr. chairman and i joined the rest of my colleagues in thanking you for calling this hearing on an incredibly important subject. i a
legislation post-columbine did not pass. so the notion that everybody should rely on quote-unquote the energy and force of newtown i would caution not to do that. it's clearly galvanized the country to have an honest conversation and look internally and have a serious conversation, but brady bill and the assault weapon ban were done without, quote-unquote, a columbine or what happened in virginia, any of those incidents. i do believe just in the last four years or i would say the last eight years of politics this, what happened there has made all of us have a discussion that has been sitting on the sidelines or the periphery of politics to be focused and this, obviously, tomorrow morning the president's going to introduce his legislation or his package and decide what legislatively he's going to do, what he's going to do by executive order. but we are at a tipping point to have a discussion that's been postponed, delayed or for whatever reason hasn't happened. but my small kind of flashing yellow light of caution is when you think of the last time we had success which goes back to '93 and '94
the single market remains incomplete and services, in energy, in digital, the very sectors that are the engine of a modern economy, it is only half the success that it could be. it is nonsense that people shopping online in some parts of europe are unable to access the best deals simply because of where they live. so i want completing the single market to be our driving missi mission. i want us to be at the forefront also of the transformative trade deals with the u.s., japan, india as part of the drive towards global free trade. and i want us to be pushing to exempt europe's smallest entrepreneurial companies from more eu directive. they should be the officials, they should be do tasks that get european officials up in the morning and keep them working late into the night. and so we urgently need to address the sclerotic, ineffective decision-making that is holding us back. that means creating a leaner, less bureaucratic union, relentlessly focused on helping its member companies compete. in the global race can we really justify the huge number of expensive peripheral euro
on the planet. companies like silicon energy in marysville are leading the world with some of the most durable solar cells ever built. janicki industries in sedro-wooley is driving innovation in aerospace. valve, a software company in bellevue has grown into a worldwide leader in interactive entertainment. and in grays harbor an across-the-board effort led to the re-opening of the paper mill last year, putting 175 people back to work making 100% recycled paper. i have this to say about washington. innovation is in our genes. [applause] we create. we invent. we build. so now we must go forward, with both high ambition and a recognition that the power of innovation will fuel the next wave of job growth in washington. make no mistake, our top priority today, tomorrow, an every single day for the next four years, is jobs. [applause] we must build a working washington, capable of sustained economic leadership in a rapidly changing world. during the campaign i put out a plan to get washington back to work that grew to over 100 points of action. my plan focuses on job growth in seven industry cluster
that a small minority could -- quote -- "destroy the energy of government." that's what madison said. a supermajority would mean that a small minority could -- quote -- "destroy the energy of government." government would, in hamilton's words, be subject to -- quote -- "the priests or ortificess, or insignificant our corrupt junt junta." james madison, as i said, it would -- he said this: "it would no longer be the majority that would riewsm the power woul rul. the power could be transferred to the minority." "federalist paper" number 58. james madison, for the author of our constitution. whesdwhen he said no, you can'te a supermajority. if do you that, then the minority would rule. power would be transferred to the minority. unfortunately, madison's warning has come true. in the senate today, the united states senate, the minority, not the majority, controls. in today's senate, american democracy is turned on its head. the minority rules; the majority is blocked. the majority has responsibility and accountability but the majority lacks the power to govern. the minority has the power
things. they were talking about the cost of energy, because our energy costs remain the highest in the nation, but they were talking about fish. pretty basic stuff -- fuel and fish. food. and so when we had disaster this summer, it was -- it was an imperative around our state. we in september of this past year had an official declaration from the secretary of commerce -- actually, the acting secretary of commerce rebecca blank recognized this fish disaster, and this is a disaster that is statutorily authorized by sections 308 of the interjurisdictional fisheries act and section 312 of the magnuson-stevens fishery conservation and management act. these are designations that are statutorily authorized. these are not earmarks. they are -- they are not to be labeled as "pork" or something special for an area. these are disasters subject to a statutory authorization, a process that has been clearly, clearly laid out, authorized in law for fish failures that requires affirmative action from the secretary of commerce. the secretary has taken that action. congress then needs to do its p
presents an urban energy, when i did not see six years ago the city streets, markets, cars and of course with cars comes traffic jams. cell phone coverage has expanded over 80% of the population and the kids are back in school. human capital summit the biggest changes since 2006 to 8 million afghans and secondary now we rely primarily on ied scum which killed more afghan coalitions. frankly the people are tired and have no desire to be controlled by insurgents. it's worsened over time and taliban movements are springing up as the people of afghanistan rejects the heavy-handed type pics of insurgents. polls indicate the majority of the afghans think the country is heading in the right direction, which is again a significant increase from my time in 2006. in the next phase in the campaign, german by security for subsistence. 400 security for subsistence teams are in place, training, advising and assisting afghan national security forces as they take lead for security. we are now bringing in built for missions, i.'s in many cases that focus on and train to assist the afghan national securit
for health care. here's our plan for energy. here's our plan for defense. and when we do that, when we put our plans out against the president's actual results, i think we'll compare quite favorably. we will win back the trust of the american people. and we will put our plans into action. that's what you do in moments like this. you pick yourself up, you dust yourself off, you fight for what you believe in, and you get back to work. we have a lot to do in the next four years. the challenges continue to mount, and it is so easy to get discouraged by it all. the election loss, the difficulty of the change that's coming. but as william f. buckley, my fellow catholic would say, it's a mortal sin to despair. i'm not ready to give up. and i know you aren't either. you wouldn't be here if you were. that's why i want to ask you for your help. in this effort every conservative needs to be involved. you know, after the election i needed to take a little bit of time. [laughter] i needed, as rich said, i needed to get into the woods because that's where i recharge. so i took my daughter, liza, hunting
at the long-term. other than washington, our last gas what he's done on research, on energy, the fact that we're e a national gas supply now that is 75 years out. back in 2002 we heard it's going to be gone and decade. by 2020 going up more oil. >> and there are none. so i will keep talking. >> we have plenty of questions. from winston-salem. >> so, how do we combine conservatism and populism to get power? that's a big problem. here is both might amateurs attempt to do that. i had a dream. i want a $40 trillion economy. i want 1% or 1.5% unemployment. the rights for blacks, latinos, and for women. we can have lot more things to do. we can abolish income tax for the entire middle class. we can send all our kids to private schools. we are rich enough to do it. we've got to make up our minds of what we want to do. that's how it is spent that speaks to how it is an immense amount of capital in the trendy. the question is how it's allocated on how it's used and whether it is used seems for the growth which is why -- >> i would like to bills thought. bill come to britain for your tenure about popul
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12